This is a thorny issue. I basically agree with your list of features that seem beside the point, but I don’t know that a slimmed down version of Cubase would be a good thing. Weighing the pros and cons of “Big Cubase”:
Big Cubase (advantages)
- IMHO, Cubase is the best DAW on the planet, largely because it’s multi-purpose. (But there are many other good reasons.) It may be unwise to undermine that.
- We want the Cubase user community to be as large as possible, and more features is part of that. It means more money available to developers, therefore better software. It also enlarges the user community, making for better peer to peer support.
- It’s good for a DAW to be user-friendly for noobs. I’m not talking about Elements vs Artist vs Pro. I’m talking about “training wheel” features that help people who are a bit lacking in knowledge of music theory or other essentials. We want people to be able to cut their teeth on Cubase so they’ll be part of the community later on.
- You never know when you want to try something new (like Loop Mash), or a friend calls you up and wants to use something that you usually ignore (like chord tracks).
Big Cubase (disadvantages)
- Development of core features possibly deprived of resources allocated to more bells and whistles.
- Design anti-patterns more likely to emerge (Big Ball of Mud, for example).
- Long download times, large disk space requirements.
- Learning curve gets bigger and bigger. Operations manual gets longer and longer. Users get more frightened and confused. Sometimes you can’t even get the big picture. Which VSTis are subtractive synths, which are granular, which are sample based? What’s the difference between Groove Agent, Beat Agent, and Acoustic Agent? How do you make all these things work together, or is that not the idea? (BTW: They can’t quite work together, but they could if Beat Designer had midi channel selection for each drum.)
I’m sure one could add to each list. The only serious disadvantage of big Cubase is the potential impact on software maintenance. This topic has been going hot and heavy for a long time:
…and it looks like many folks would prefer a stronger core.
The problem of disk space consumption and long download times seem very minor these days. Most users have large disks and fast internet connections. You don’t have to download very often either.
That leaves the issue of complexity. I’m grateful to have this embarrassment of riches. Learning curve or not, I can always decide to learn something later or not at all. But that’s not your point. You said that a bloatware version should be available, so I presume the issue is having too many distracting items and options in the user interface (menus, toolbars, wherever). If that’s the case, then what you really want is more customization available in user interface, such as being able to choose menu items that should not be displayed by default. It would improve the workflow. Each unfamiliar and never used item adds delay and distraction to the job. We already do have some control, but more would be nice, especially as the number of features grows.